Practical use of Ethereum.

[sbtctalk]

I was looking at Poloniec margin lending feature and i have a wild thought:

Is it possible to lend bitcoins at Poloniex and use Eth contract to enforce poloniex to return the loaned bitcoins automatically to my bitcoin address 30 days later?

[mining1]

Not sure, but here's the latest practical use https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqAIMxZrE8Q

[sbtctalk]

Not sure, but here's the latest practical use https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqAIMxZrE8Q

Thanks. This looks informative. Not sure if my ideal usage of ethereum is how it is supposed to be.

[kiklo]

I was looking at Poloniec margin lending feature and i have a wild thought:

Is it possible to lend bitcoins at Poloniex and use Eth contract to enforce poloniex to return the loaned bitcoins automatically to my bitcoin address 30 days later?

Considering all of the problems with DAO, I sincerely doubt Poloniex would be stupid enough to use Eth for anything related to the transfer of coins on their system.
It would be like a death wish.

Eth is good for only 1 thing driving the price of hard drives higher with all of Eth wasted bloated storage space sucking requirements. 
Buy Stock in Western Digital & Seagate to make money off of ETH.


 

FYI:
You do know Eth has Zero Legal Standing as an enforceable legal contract. 

[TraderETH]

I was looking at Poloniec margin lending feature and i have a wild thought:

Is it possible to lend bitcoins at Poloniex and use Eth contract to enforce poloniex to return the loaned bitcoins automatically to my bitcoin address 30 days later?

Considering all of the problems with DAO, I sincerely doubt Poloniex would be stupid enough to use Eth for anything related to the transfer of coins on their system.
It would be like a death wish.

Eth is good for only 1 thing driving the price of hard drives higher with all of Eth wasted bloated storage space sucking requirements. 
Buy Stock in Western Digital & Seagate to make money off of ETH.


 

FYI:
You do know Eth has Zero Legal Standing as an enforceable legal contract. 

I agree with your opinion, although there were many people said that ETH has big money because of many companies made investment into ETH. For it is dangerous make investment into ETH even if just for short term investment.

[Gastotade]

I was looking at Poloniec margin lending feature and i have a wild thought:

Is it possible to lend bitcoins at Poloniex and use Eth contract to enforce poloniex to return the loaned bitcoins automatically to my bitcoin address 30 days later?

Considering all of the problems with DAO, I sincerely doubt Poloniex would be stupid enough to use Eth for anything related to the transfer of coins on their system.
It would be like a death wish.

Eth is good for only 1 thing driving the price of hard drives higher with all of Eth wasted bloated storage space sucking requirements. 
Buy Stock in Western Digital & Seagate to make money off of ETH.


 

FYI:
You do know Eth has Zero Legal Standing as an enforceable legal contract. 

That might change. For example, the DAO hacker got the ETC from the stolen DAO due to a smart contract.

[kiklo]

I was looking at Poloniec margin lending feature and i have a wild thought:

Is it possible to lend bitcoins at Poloniex and use Eth contract to enforce poloniex to return the loaned bitcoins automatically to my bitcoin address 30 days later?

Considering all of the problems with DAO, I sincerely doubt Poloniex would be stupid enough to use Eth for anything related to the transfer of coins on their system.
It would be like a death wish.

Eth is good for only 1 thing driving the price of hard drives higher with all of Eth wasted bloated storage space sucking requirements.  
Buy Stock in Western Digital & Seagate to make money off of ETH.


 

FYI:
You do know Eth has Zero Legal Standing as an enforceable legal contract.  

That might change. For example, the DAO hacker got the ETC from the stolen DAO due to a smart contract.

LOL, ,  not anytime soon.

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/a-lawyer-s-perspective-can-smart-contracts-exist-outside-the-legal-structure-1468263134

"Smart contracts" seem to be the buzzwords that are gaining increasing traction in the digital market.
It is a sound enough idea, a contract that will rewrite itself according to commercial circumstances surrounding it
by using a complex series of rules embedded in its coding.

The ideas behind it are equally as sound theoretically.
Less input from the contracting parties means that smart contracts will come into being quicker and,
therefore, allow for transactions to be raised and completed more quickly.
Also, the fact that smart contracts require less input from both the parties involved and their lawyers,
will make commerce more fluid and more cost-effective both in terms of time and legal fees.

The only potential problem is that once you get past the theory and examine the practical with a legal eye,
you start to see that it is actually difficult to consider a smart contract as either smart or a contract and
that it is probably more accurate to drop the term smart contract; instead, referring to them as automated computer code.

Also, code works on linear decision-making and probability, but more often than not,
finding the right answer to settle a particular contractual nuance is a much more lateral process
and requires a level of creativity and flexibility that can come only from real-life experience.
To inject that depth of practical experience into code is, I would suggest, a nigh on impossible task.

This takes us on to another potential failing: If things turn sour between the contracted parties, who is there to sort things out?
There is a common myth that a smart contract cannot be litigated, but I would disagree.
As long as the heads of terms that sit behind the contracts are clear – and have clearly been accepted by the parties – there is scope to litigate
if the code is deemed not to be fit for purpose or has affected the transactions it is meant to support and/or the payments associated with those transactions.

This is, however, where things could get more complicated.  
As there is currently no international internet law,
the original contract would have to set out the jurisdictions of the parties and which country’s law the contract is reliant upon.
Again, these aren’t decisions that code can make, so these definitions and agreements would have to be made by people, quite possibly with specialist legal advice.  

And that is why I don’t believe that smart contracts in their current form can be considered smart or contracts.
As I said earlier, I don’t want this to come across as just another defensive letter of self-preservation from a lawyer in fear of losing fees.
As an experienced litigator who has fought for years to ensure my clients always get the best possible protection from their commercial contracts,
it concerns me is that an idea or even just a buzzword could lead numerous businesses into difficult and potentially very costly situations
just because they had bought into the next big thing.

 

FYI:
More Accurate
Smart Contracts = Suckers Hype

Without 3rd party verification of IDs , Age requirements, Mental Stability Guidelines, consent to the local laws of whichever government they are in,
You are looking at a hard fork every time a judge rules a contract was invalid.  

[sbtctalk]

So etheruem is overhyped? Societies has a code of conduct and binding principles to abide by. But if smart contracts are not legal binding... then why spend money on ether? I might as well stick to my cron jobs.

[kiklo]

So etheruem is overhyped? Societies has a code of conduct and binding principles to abide by. But if smart contracts are not legal binding... then why spend money on ether? I might as well stick to my cron jobs.

IMO,
There is no real reason to buy eth or etc , once people realize it is not legally binding in any way.
It being legally binding has been a misconception fostered by the people behind it to make money off of the speculation of the uninformed.


 

[sbtctalk]

So etheruem is overhyped? Societies has a code of conduct and binding principles to abide by. But if smart contracts are not legal binding... then why spend money on ether? I might as well stick to my cron jobs.

IMO,
There is no real reason to buy eth or etc , once people realize it is not legally binding in any way.
It being legally binding has been a misconception fostered by the people behind it to make money off of the speculation of the uninformed.


 

So what is the big fuss over Ethereum again? Oh..it is profitable! But what is the main purpose of Ethereum again?

[Ayers]

So etheruem is overhyped? Societies has a code of conduct and binding principles to abide by. But if smart contracts are not legal binding... then why spend money on ether? I might as well stick to my cron jobs.

IMO,
There is no real reason to buy eth or etc , once people realize it is not legally binding in any way.
It being legally binding has been a misconception fostered by the people behind it to make money off of the speculation of the uninformed.


 

So what is the big fuss over Ethereum again? Oh..it is profitable! But what is the main purpose of Ethereum again?

the hilarious thing about etheruem is that it was born like a decentralized platform, but it's very well everything but that, it's now very centralized how funny

[raphma]

do you understand how poloniex lending work? why would a smart contract be needed?
the money doesnt leave your wallet, it's only a margin trade.

[amacar2]

Lending in poloniex margin trading is almost automatic process and i don't think any body can scam it without paying fees. Margin lending are not like P2P lending system, poloniex lending is almost risk free so i don't think smart contract is needed for them to process payment and fee automatically.

[Jatmin]

do you understand how poloniex lending work? why would a smart contract be needed?
the money doesnt leave your wallet, it's only a margin trade.

That is right. The lending is inside the database of the Poloniex. It is to be seen on the block chain.

[sbtctalk]

I think the value of Etheruem is not the physical aspect but it is the concepts behind it. Banks could easily build a side chain and run it internally.


But i still probably don't understand ethereum. If you need ether to automate certain tasks, why not set a cron job?

[sbtctalk]

I am not promoting any scams here - but see this site which claims to double your ethereum: http://doubler-ethereum2.rhcloud.com/

I thought it was fascinating that there was perhaps some kind of mining in place ... until i peeked the source code...https://etherchain.org/account/0x7fd6d3537b39842cfe16e813851296d4745b51a7#code. lol 

Code:

		// while there are enough ether on the balance we can pay out to an earlier participant
    while (balance > participants[payoutIdx].amount * 2) {
      uint transactionAmount = participants[payoutIdx].amount / 50 * 98;
      participants[payoutIdx].etherAddress.send(transactionAmount);

      balance -= participants[payoutIdx].amount * 2;
      payoutIdx += 1;
    }
  }

[densuj]

So etheruem is overhyped? Societies has a code of conduct and binding principles to abide by. But if smart contracts are not legal binding... then why spend money on ether? I might as well stick to my cron jobs.

IMO,
There is no real reason to buy eth or etc , once people realize it is not legally binding in any way.
It being legally binding has been a misconception fostered by the people behind it to make money off of the speculation of the uninformed.


 

So what is the big fuss over Ethereum again? Oh..it is profitable! But what is the main purpose of Ethereum again?

the hilarious thing about etheruem is that it was born like a decentralized platform, but it's very well everything but that, it's now very centralized how funny

Yes you are right, ETH today is not decentralize coin, it is just hard fork of coin because of DAO and with some people has a lot of money who made investment into ETH. The real of ethereum is ETC for today and there are not practical usage of ETH on real life except for trading and play HYIP.

[Ayers]

So etheruem is overhyped? Societies has a code of conduct and binding principles to abide by. But if smart contracts are not legal binding... then why spend money on ether? I might as well stick to my cron jobs.

IMO,
There is no real reason to buy eth or etc , once people realize it is not legally binding in any way.
It being legally binding has been a misconception fostered by the people behind it to make money off of the speculation of the uninformed.


 

So what is the big fuss over Ethereum again? Oh..it is profitable! But what is the main purpose of Ethereum again?

the hilarious thing about etheruem is that it was born like a decentralized platform, but it's very well everything but that, it's now very centralized how funny

Yes you are right, ETH today is not decentralize coin, it is just hard fork of coin because of DAO and with some people has a lot of money who made investment into ETH. The real of ethereum is ETC for today and there are not practical usage of ETH on real life except for trading and play HYIP.

yeah too bad tc is not recognized quite well they only see it as a troll coin, it gathered some traction, but it is stuck there without new investors

[Sir Alpha_goy]

The most practical use of ETH is to line Poloniex's pockets with fees.

Nothing more and nothing less.

[dinofelis]

Eth is good for only 1 thing driving the price of hard drives higher with all of Eth wasted bloated storage space sucking requirements. 
Buy Stock in Western Digital & Seagate to make money off of ETH.

   I like that one.

You do know Eth has Zero Legal Standing as an enforceable legal contract. 

This is in fact not fair as a comment, because the whole idea is that a smart contract doesn't need any legal enforcing, as it enforces it *automatically*.  In fact, what is needed, is a protection AGAINST legal interference.  This is why ethereum has a problem being a transparent block chain, and we have seen that problem before our very eyes with the hard fork: the whole concept of smart contract FAILED there, *because* some self-appointed judges (not even official state affiliated ones) RULED that a smart contract's outcome were not to be.

They could do this, because the block chain is traceable, and one could find the "guilty one" of using the contract according to its terms.  If the ethereum block chain would have been totally obfuscated, then the hard fork wouldn't have been possible and the smart contract would have been unstoppable.

If a smart contract IS unstoppable, and the actions of the contractors are obfuscated, then a smart contract is REALLY a smart contract of which 1) no legal enforcing is needed and 2) no legal undoing is possible.

In that case, and only in that case, we truly have a smart contract over which no discussion, no ruling, no vote can, will or is needed to happen.

I could think of a smart contract like this one: suppose that I want a security audit of my computing system.  I can write out a smart contract that pays anyone who can produce the hash of a document I hide somewhere on my computing system.  If anyone can break into my system and get that document, then that person can get paid.  And not otherwise.

That would be a typical application of a (small) smart contract.  (true, I could do it with bitcoin too, by hiding the secret key of a bitcoin wallet somewhere, so my example is too simple).

No "legal dispute" can happen over that contract.  I cannot "sue" any person that used the contract.  The contractor cannot sue me because I didn't put the file online and just set up a honeypot to find crackers.  The contract is what it is, and the legal system cannot interfere with it, nor to "impose" it, nor to "destroy" it.